Comments on: Debate: Should F1 cars have cockpit covers?

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Thu, 29 May 2008 23:22:57 +0000

It’s easy to throw insults around Gusstavo. I assume you aren’t aware that following the incident described here the governing body mandated an increase in cockpit side height for this year’s season to protect drivers in the event of a similar accident?

Open cockpits aren’t there to make the drivers more susceptible to danger – although they do bring risks, they do make it easier for a driver to escape a car that might be on fire.

By: Gusstavo Adolfo Franco

Gusstavo Adolfo Franco — Thu, 29 May 2008 22:55:28 +0000

May be the only thing that many of you want to see is blood, there is not a big difference between you and the roman people that attend roman anfiteatro.

By: Jonathan Weston

Jonathan Weston — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:57:33 +0000

F1 cars are remarkably safe for a machine that moves at over 200 mph – please no cockpit covers -

By: bobdaspider

bobdaspider — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 00:14:55 +0000

Covered cockpits – hhhmmnn, that would be the time I’d stop watching F1. Driving very fast cars is by definition dangerous. Whilst we can, I say keep the health and safety brigade out of F1. Sensible safety measures which do not dilute the sport – sure but care is needed. Tinker too much and it won’t be ‘F1′ as loved and enjoyed by many.

^o^

By: james steventon

james steventon — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 04:52:06 +0000

I agree with earlier posts that some sort of ‘deflecters’ should be
installed to protect the drivers head in the case of a side impact.
However, this would not prevent a driver from potentially being hurt or
worse from a head on impact with a foreign object.
Ofcourse, Aryton Senna’s crash is a classic case of this happening.
Probably the most horrific case was the 1977 South African Grand Prix
when a driver and a fire marshal were killed in a collision at very
highspeed.
My point? In all forms of open wheel racing the drivers head will always be exposed depending on the circumstances of the collision. Hitting a wall at 190mph head on is, no matter what the safety measures,
no laughing matter! Hence, the huge appeal of open wheel racing.
To enclose the driver would be like swimming in a shark cage without
the sharks! It would be pointless

By: Richard C

Richard C — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 09:59:23 +0000

Keep the open cockpits, I’m with Number 38 on this one, the drivers are remote enough as it is. No-one wants to put drivers at risk of injury or worse but there has to be the danger that a serious miscalculation can cause an injury. If that disappears you will end up with the door banging nonsense that Touring cars sometimes degenerates to, if that’s what you want to see, watch that.

By: Number 38

Number 38 — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 15:33:14 +0000

OPEN COCKPIT? I didn’t know they were, all I ever see is a website address on the visor! Sorry guys, I’m the ‘old one’, I’m from the era when we could see the driver DRIVING. The drivers were known by their helmet design which was NOT part of the cars colour scheme!
They didn’t need their name on the side of the car. My view of the Wurz/Coulthard incident, albeit from a lazyboy reclining chair, it looked like
Coulthard came in too fast, Wurz wasn’t giving any room,
Coulthard was forced to the right and got launched when he hit the kerb. A high risk move on Coulthard’s part but Wurz COULD have finished the race had he given way. And who else even tried a pass……the race generally was just a parade.
You want more passing……clip the wings, far less downforce
would make the difference. At 120 mph these cars generate enough downforce they could drive on the ceiling, that’s just not necessary, because they now RELY on downforce any interruption to downforce, such as the car ahead which you’re trying to overtake, impedes your car control hence less attempts are made.
Wings belong on aircraft.
Number 38

By: jtm

jtm — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 03:46:45 +0000

I was thinking the same thing as soon as I saw that wreck, but I do think that the ease of extraction from the open top probably trumps the closed cockpit. I wonder if it would be possible to install some pylons ahead of the driver so that something (e.g., a Red Bull car) sliding from the front toward the back would be blocked or lifted above the drivers head. This would keep the cockpit open and, provided driver vision isn’t significantly impared by the pylons, provide a safe halo around the head.

By: Douglas Lang

Douglas Lang — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 01:48:07 +0000

Currently the cockpits must have a regulation opening to allow easy extraction in an emergency. Cockpit covers could well cause difficulties in this area. Roll bars and those bumps beside the cockpit are now mandatory as is the HANS device. The HANS device and those ‘bumps’ beside the cockpit are of course to limit neck injuries in accidents(as is the role of the roll bar to some extent). The great construction of helmets now limits head injuries significantly.

Nanotechnology will soon be abundant in Formula 1 cars, the gains in strength and lower mass may well make fully enclosed cockpits a little more feasible, as speeds continue to increase they may also become necessary.

A wide carbon fibre tunnel extending from the roll cage encasing the head fully at the top and sides while still allowing enough freedom of head movement would increase safety in an accident. However it would certainly hinder extraction(not to mention entry) from the car, driver visibiltiy would probably be impaired to some extent. Also aerodynamics would suffer(plastic covers would be added to fully enclose the cockpit) and mass distribuition would suffer(expect a minimum CoG to be introduced in the future though so this won’t be of such importance).

The way to have it implemented for safety would be to find a way in which it could be done while not hindering extraction and make it a regulation.

By: chunter

chunter — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 22:31:52 +0000

^^^^^
What they said.

In all seriousness, as many times as I’ve seen examples of open-topped cars inverted or in danger of having something else land on top of them, I have never seen an honest precedent that would require a covered cockpit. Furthermore, by creating yet another impediment to exiting the vehicle, it could cause more problems than it solves. Finally, Formula 1 are the likes that if a rule were passed, say, to allow Flex Wings under the condition that the entire monocoque be made of the same bendy substance, and some team found out it was really faster, all the teams would have such chassis within weeks.

Another point that would remain aerodynamic and sound to F1′s design; why not just create a deflector that is likely to draw the speeding car away from the pilot’s helmet?

Good topic, though.